dcfandomcom-20200222-history
DC Database talk:Volume Template
That little bar with lowercase letters but no period at the top Can we remove it? The one at the bottom is necessary, I guess. But I'm not really a fan of the entire extended Comic List template, I feel like it looks a little ugly (no offense to any parties). Also, having those bars in automatically makes it so that on the lists for titles for larger characters, like "Detective Comics," we can't manually put in "Back to Batman Titles." But can we at least remove the line from the top (leaving the bottom one in place), and capitalize "Back to Letter Selection"? :- Billy Arrowsmith, 17:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC) 1994-1998 So, there's a pretty significant and continuous problem with any comic that was published through 1994 or 1998. Both of those years, there were crossover events. 1994 saw Zero Hour, which put out a lot of #0 issues in one month. And 1998 had DC One Million, which saw a massive number of #1,000,000 crossovers. As such, those being the high and low extremes for our numbering system, lists like Action Comics (1939 - Present) believe themselves to have only been going from 1994 through 1998. :- Billy Arrowsmith (Talk), 04:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC) :The easiest way to get around this is the manual overrides, "| StartYear = ", "| EndYear = ". :But I could write some more code into it that would compare the first and last two years of comics in the category and pick the highest/lowest. Of course we'd still have problems if say there was an issue 0, an issue 1/2, and an issue 1, with 1 being the actual start. :I've been working on a way to revise the 'first issue', 'last issue' year getting, which is usually the key problem when trying to get the start/stop years. It'd be nice if we could go through and flag these issues for each comic series, but I think that might be too much work. . . :— Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talk • • ) 13:52, 30 September 2008 (UTC) Yeah, and there's still the problem of comics that actually do start with #0, like I think Legionnaires Vol 1 did. :- Billy Arrowsmith (Talk), 14:43, 30 September 2008 (UTC) Trade Paperbacks Perhaps this should be changed to "Collections"? TPB kinda excludes the hardcover collections, of which there are many. --Brian Kurtz 16:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC) :Are you referring to article pagenames or an option in this template? 'Cause I've noticed the inconsistencies with article names and have been meaning to bring it up somewhere. In the template, I've been using "Reprints" as the Type because it's inclusive of things like TPBs, Millennium Editions, Showcase Presents, etc. The Paradox 17:18, 17 December 2008 (UTC) ::Just the wording on the template. I don't mean the "Type" field, I'm referring to beneath the issue list where it indicates "Trade Paperbacks" accompanied by year of publication. ::And yeah, the TPB naming conventions are sort of a mess. I'm trying to hammer something out to make things more consistent. --Brian Kurtz 17:52, 17 December 2008 (UTC) :::Ah, I see what you mean now and agree that Collections would be a more inclusive term - consider it done. I look forward to seeing how the naming conventions for collections/TPB/reprints is resolved :) The Paradox 18:09, 17 December 2008 (UTC) Transitory Vertigo Should Vertigo be included under the Publisher field if the series began as a DC Comics title? Specifically, I'm speaking of books that were in mid-run when the Vertigo concept was created: Animal Man, Doom Patrol, Hellblazer, Sandman, Swampy, etc. --Brian Kurtz 14:46, 19 December 2008 (UTC) ::I vote yes. :::- Billy Arrowsmith (Talk), 15:14, 19 December 2008 (UTC) :::I'm also inclined to say yes, if only because we have no way of breaking it up and saying "these issues are Vertigo, but those aren't." On a related note, should Imprints and independent Publishers use the same template for their Titles? The Paradox 15:41, 19 December 2008 (UTC) Template Format To all the people who've worked on this - kudos, it's super. But there's always room for improvement. For example, have a look at this sample application: Do we really need to see the words "Madame Xanadu Vol 1" like five times at the top of the page? Maybe we could get rid of the blue thing at the top and just ensure all that info appears in the Infobox? I dig the "Previous" and "Next" volumes, but couldn't these go in the Infobox the same as "Previous" and "Next" issues in the Comic template? And the links to the comic list? Anyone see a pattern here? Oh, and if someone had uploaded a logo, then it would appear again. Maybe a series logo could also go in ... the Infobox? 00:51, 15 June 2009 (UTC) Maybe more like this kind of layout (note: instead of Previous Issue it would say Previous Volume): :EXCELLENT suggestions! As you wonderful developers at DC have branched away from the format we use over on Marvel, I'll leave it up to you to clean this out, but if you need any help, you know where to reach me! :) :— Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talk • • ) 05:07, 15 June 2009 (UTC) :::Again, I can suggest stuff all day long - figuring out the code, not so much. ::: 11:43, 15 June 2009 (UTC) Something like this: Maybe with a DPL component similar to the monthly that grabs the covers and links and populates them. That way, you only need to maybe make reference to the last issue, and it becomes automatically and obviously apparent what issues are missing or what covers are missing, etc. Also, I would like Liv Tyler or Tina Fey delivered to my apartment. Can someone get on that first? ;-) 23:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Discussion on this topic can be found here. You know, on the forums. 01:29, 5 July 2009 (UTC) Outdated logo File:New DC logo.png needs replacing with File:DC Rebirth Logo.png. Digifiend (talk) 11:41, October 17, 2016 (UTC) Updated look suggestion This template is different from others because it has a large box at the top, then a page wide "Comics Contents" navbar from the old days, and then the infobox. To bring it more in line with other templates, some suggestions: * Get rid of the "Back to Comics Contents" line at the top and bottom. How many (or how few) people actually browse by category, especially with categories as unwieldingly big as ours? * That box at the top should go. The brief summary at the top is handy, but the text underneath is a maintenance notice that belongs on categories and not standard on every volume. It's not very reader friendly. * Maybe rework the top line of that box in a standard note for the history section if nothing is filled out. {PAGENAME} is a volume by {PUBLISHER} that ran for {ISSUES} from {BEGINYEAR} to {ENDYEAR}starring {FEATURED}. Those are just some suggestions. Any ideas? --[[User:Tupka217|'Tupka']]''217'' 11:40, May 18, 2017 (UTC) :I like the ideas. I'm game, if someone can make it work. - S.S. (talk) 15:58, May 18, 2017 (UTC) ::Okay, so I've removed the "Back to Comics" from the top only. I've made it so that the blurb at the top with the pagename and years only shows up if there's a logo image, which will appear up top - not in a messagebox. I've added a default blurb of text that uses the infobox information to form a possible three complete sentences using the template Tupka suggested. This also adds "Volume History Needed" as a category, because expansion is preferable to reproducing info that's available in the infobox. - Hatebunny (talk) 00:06, May 19, 2017 (UTC) :::Looks good... except when there are multiple Featured characters filled out - Batman: Gordon's Law Vol 1. --[[User:Tupka217|'Tupka']]''217'' 14:50, May 19, 2017 (UTC) ::::Fixed that, I think. - Hatebunny (talk) 15:06, May 19, 2017 (UTC)